No post body was provided.
I used simple rules to make DFAs that kinda match accepted physics models
1–10 of 15 posts
Re: I used simple rules to make DFAs that kinda match accepted physics models
#2[deleted]
Re: I used simple rules to make DFAs that kinda match accepted physics models
#3Prompt?
Re: I used simple rules to make DFAs that kinda match accepted physics models
#4I was interested to read this but .... Can't make the text bigger because it doesn't wrap properly, and the image doesn't scroll with the text.
Re: I used simple rules to make DFAs that kinda match accepted physics models
#5Prompt?
surely if this was AI generated there would be better sentence structure and punctuation?
Re: I used simple rules to make DFAs that kinda match accepted physics models
#6I was interested to read this but .... Can't make the text bigger because it doesn't wrap properly, and the image doesn't scroll with the text.
I read this. There is nothing that could indicate that those cellular automata match any physics, besides author saying so. There is only some diagrams and a lot of statements like:
> "d" represents the big bang singularity, which creates alot of (but not all?) matter. So this variation has inflation as a pocketed expansion of matterfilled space. (& "b" & "b1234" make alot more sense in this context.)"
There is nothing that would explain how "d" represents the bing bang, matter or dimensions. I think this is rambling of someone who read too much Wolfram works. It looks very impressive, like TempleOS.
Re: I used simple rules to make DFAs that kinda match accepted physics models
#7Are we getting a new standard, now that the Timecube website is gone?
Re: I used simple rules to make DFAs that kinda match accepted physics models
#8I've never seen someone write "&" as a total replacement for "and". I don't like the way it makes me feel.
Re: I used simple rules to make DFAs that kinda match accepted physics models
#9I've never seen someone write "&" as a total replacement for "and". I don't like the way it makes me feel.
I saw it on HN before (and did not like that, either), while now noticed it in another submission by the same user, on a similar topic. [0]
Apart from that, as mentioned in another comment here, the article's content seems no less strange than the style.
Re: I used simple rules to make DFAs that kinda match accepted physics models
#10I've never seen someone write "&" as a total replacement for "and". I don't like the way it makes me feel.
&y'du think so?